transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:01] Support for this show comes from the 2027 Chevy Bolt. Oh, I love the Chevy Bolt, I have mine. How long is 25 minutes? A quick workout or a stop to the grocery store is all the amount of time it takes you to charge your Chevy Bolt. As I said, I drive the Chevy Bolt myself, an older version, and now the Bolt is back and better than ever. I may have to trade it in. You can charge from 10 percent to 80 percent in just 25 minutes with public DC fast charging. That's about half the length of this very podcast. Explore Chevy's most affordable EV at chevy.com/bold. Actual charge times will vary. You see owner's manual for details and limitations. Let me say again, I love my car, never had a problem with it, best car I've ever owned by the Chevy Bolt. Support for this show comes from MongoDB. If you're a developer stuck fixing bottlenecks instead of building the next big thing, then you need MongoDB. Mongo is the flexible unified platform that gets out of your way. It's ACID compliant, enterprise ready, and built to ship AI apps fast. And it's trusted by so many of the Fortune 500 with their most critical workloads. Developers have a word for that kind of reliability.

Speaker 2:
[01:12] Actually, five words.

Speaker 1:
[01:13] It's a great fucking database. Start building at mongodb.com/build. Support for this show comes from the Futurology podcast. With so much changing every minute, it can sometimes feel useless to think more than a few days ahead. But looking at what's to come can completely reshape how we take on the future. And that's exactly what they're talking about on Futurology, a new podcast from the Berougan Institute, featuring some of the world's brightest minds focused on what the future looks like and how to design a better one. Subscribe to Futurology on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 3:
[01:51] You're an influencer. We got to take you to Coachella and just have you take pictures and not enjoy the music.

Speaker 1:
[01:58] Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

Speaker 3:
[02:03] And I'm Scott Galloway.

Speaker 1:
[02:04] Hey, Scott, I just flew in from San Francisco and boy, are my arms tired.

Speaker 3:
[02:09] Yeah, I've heard that joke before. Why did you come back or what's going on?

Speaker 1:
[02:14] Why did I come back? That's a very good question because I love San Francisco. I spent the weekend with my beautiful son. I helped him on his job. He's campaigning for a city council.

Speaker 3:
[02:23] I saw that. Those were cute pictures.

Speaker 1:
[02:24] Yeah, we had a great time when we cooked and we went hiking.

Speaker 3:
[02:28] Let me guess, Hardcore Republican?

Speaker 4:
[02:30] No.

Speaker 1:
[02:31] But I was there because I was on Bill Maher and I went to Gwyneth Paltrow's house to do the podcast.

Speaker 3:
[02:36] I saw you. I tuned in. I almost never watched live TV and I tuned in live. I thought your interview was good, not great. I thought you were great on Overtime.

Speaker 1:
[02:46] Oh, well, thank you. Why was my interview good, not great? Thank you, sir.

Speaker 3:
[02:51] I just felt like it never really got going and I wanted to hear more. I should have just started with, I thought you were great and I thought you were especially strong on Overtime.

Speaker 1:
[03:02] That's how I started from there. That's okay. Don't worry about it. Anyway, it was good. It was actually I had an enjoyable time. It was Rahm Emanuel and Jake Sullivan, which was interesting.

Speaker 3:
[03:10] Yeah. I love the producers. They're the total Friday night lights like parents everybody wants.

Speaker 1:
[03:16] Yes, they're great. They're really wonderful. Everyone was great. It was really nice to be there. Ari Emanuel made an appearance because Rahm was there for a second, yelled at me when I was in the makeup room and then ran. He's turning 65, by the way. Good job getting to Medicare, Ari.

Speaker 3:
[03:31] That guy looks good. Ari Emanuel looks very good for 65.

Speaker 1:
[03:35] He looks good. All the Emanuel's are in good shape, I have to say. I went on John Lovett. I did a lot of press for the CNN thing. Let me hear your gripe. Go ahead, gripe away.

Speaker 3:
[03:44] Just like members clubs and streaming platforms, I join everything. Anything, I'm like whatever, Paramount plus plus plus plus plus until I unsubscribe, but I generally join everything. I could not for the life of me find where to watch your goddamn show.

Speaker 1:
[04:01] Right, which you're on.

Speaker 3:
[04:02] I went on cnn.com and typed in, I typed in Kara Swisher wants to live forever. I got your trailer, but I couldn't find where to sign up to download the program. I'm like, okay folks, what's the point of producing this content if no one can find it? I like Mark Thompson, I like the people at CNN. But as I always say in business and in relationships, get the easy stuff right. If somebody wants to watch it, the first search result, the first thing in AI, the first thing on your fucking website, when someone types in Kara Swisher wants to live forever, should be how to watch. I spent a half an hour and I couldn't find the show, Kara.

Speaker 1:
[04:43] They showed it several times on Saturday night. It was right came in after Bill Maher also, they re-broadcast it on CNN and then they showed it four times and then they showed the first one on the network and then it goes to the app. It just goes to the app until it goes to streaming and then it'll go to streaming later, 30 days I think.

Speaker 3:
[05:03] But I have the app and not only that, I'm not 140 fucking years old, I don't watch linear TV. Saying it's on four times on linear TV.

Speaker 1:
[05:11] I know, I'm just telling you what they did.

Speaker 3:
[05:13] It's like saying, your CPAP is working, you just can't find it. I mean, anyways, I'm sure I'm going to hear from them and they're going to tell me I'm the idiot here, which is probably true.

Speaker 1:
[05:23] All right, I will speak to them right now and I'm going to send you a link. I know they're trying to really encourage that business so they go digital. So I get it. Makes sense.

Speaker 3:
[05:31] And people will pay. I think they do on balance, have the best, most balanced newsroom in the world, maybe with the exception of the Wall Street Journal. People would pay. I pay. CNN could call me, I'll pay, I'll sign up, take my money.

Speaker 1:
[05:45] He wants some consensual digital action is what he wants, especially because he's in it. Anyway, I had a beautiful time with Louis Swisher and we had a really good time. And by the way, I think it helped because people did recognize me when I was sitting at the table there and said, How's Scott? Everybody did. So Scott, you helped my son do his job too. He said, next time bring a celebrity every time you're doing Canvas and so I guess we are what passes for as a celebrity in San Francisco.

Speaker 3:
[06:12] Your son was making fun. Anything from Tears for Fear, I post on threads and your son wrote, How Boomer.

Speaker 1:
[06:17] Okay, Boomer.

Speaker 3:
[06:18] Everybody wants to rule the world. Finally, one of the greatest bands of the 80s is getting the recognition it deserves. I'd like to roll with Tears for Fears, Kash Patel and Emily Rodikowski, because those guys would be too old. Kash will make me seem sexy and boom, Emily and I will announce our love.

Speaker 1:
[06:33] Okay. We were getting our feet massaged after doing the canvassing as a little gift to him and his girlfriend and he saw that and he goes, Oh my God, Boomer.

Speaker 5:
[06:45] It's really funny.

Speaker 1:
[06:47] Then he said, in admiration. Then he said, in admiration. Anyway, let's get up to Kash Patel. I mean, he just filed a $250 million defamation suit against The Atlantic over an article he called, a quote, hit piece. It was not a hit piece. The Atlantic is calling the suit meritless. The story is based on interviews with more than two dozen current and former officials about Patel's time at the FBI. It alleges excessive drinking, frequent absences and erratic freakouts, including over computer sign-in. There were reportedly multiple times over the past year where Patel's security detail had trouble waking him because he appeared to be intoxicated. One incident involved a request for breaching equipment, the kind a SWAT team use after Patel was unreachable behind locked doors. I mean, this story was like, anyone who saw him, his antics, his drunken antics at the Olympics, it was disturbing enough and throwing drinkings, screaming. He was clearly drunk. He always looks drunk when he's on Fox News. It looked like it to me. He just looked crazy actually. Who knows if he's just that way. So what do you think is happening here? What's going on as to the lawsuit?

Speaker 3:
[07:58] Look, I think the Atlantic, my sense is this is Stoffel reporting and it seems like his drinking is an open secret. It's not about alcoholism. In my view, it's incompetence. I don't doubt that the alcohol hurts him, but generally speaking, this is an incompetent person who has lacked judgment, doesn't show up for work on time, panics. He's so skittish. He thinks that he's being fired. I don't mind you drinking during the weeknight if you work for me, but be at work the next morning. And if you're not drinking and you don't show up at work, it doesn't matter why you aren't showing up for work. This guy doesn't appear to be showing up.

Speaker 1:
[08:39] Right, right. This was alleging that drinking had a lot to do with it, is he drinks so much, he drinks to excess that he doesn't. He also creates a national security risk, which is, I think, why all these people are leaking, right? It's not because they dislike him, but he also is a huge national security risk. He's also abusing his privileges. Very Kristi Noem here, right? This is the version of Kristi Noem, and obviously, it's sort of who's going to take him down, right?

Speaker 3:
[09:06] Well, I like the idea, him and Axsath are now referred to as the liquor cabinet. I think that's a good one. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[09:13] There was a good one. They said, a defense secretary, FBI head and a lead prosecutor go into a bar. Oh wait, that happens every day. It was for Jeanine Biro, is the other one they were talking about. This group is really kind of just like, so not in control of themselves. Let me just say the one thing that really was the most disturbing in that entire story was that he then will try to do something to please Trump, like try to prosecute people who prosecuted January 6th people or do election denial. He's going to try to serve up like a little mouse to Trump in order to save his job. And the only thing that Trump hates is drinking because his brother was an alcoholic and died. But it'll be interesting if Trump will not fire him because of this piece, if that makes sense.

Speaker 3:
[10:02] Yeah, my first girlfriend was Mexican and an alcoholic, and she used to order drinks called, and I asked her what her favorite book was, and she said Tequila Mockingbird.

Speaker 1:
[10:13] Oh my God. Okay. Well, anyway, do you think Trump will fire him?

Speaker 3:
[10:18] That's not very good, isn't it?

Speaker 1:
[10:20] I think Trump's going to fire him. He's going to fire a couple of these people.

Speaker 3:
[10:23] Three guys walking to a bar, an alcoholic, a priest and a child molester. And that's just the first guy.

Speaker 1:
[10:30] All right. All right. I need your thoughts on whether Trump's going to fire him. All right. We're done with the drunk jokes. Go ahead.

Speaker 3:
[10:37] So get this, according to, according to Kalshi, there's now a something like a 70 or 80 percent chance that Patel was fired by June 1st. And the other one that just blew my mind, which I would take the over, under on, or whatever you call it, that there's about a 70 percent chance that Trump is impeached by January 1st. So these markets are saying, these markets are predicting that the wheels are coming off the bus here, which I find really unlikely here.

Speaker 1:
[11:10] What does Scott Galloway think, not Kalshi?

Speaker 3:
[11:12] Oh, Patel's out. But I've thought that for a while. I think he reflects poorly. I think Hagsath, the president likes, because when Hagsath gets up on stage, he is so strident, he's very handsome. I think that Trump really values aesthetics. He's indignant, he's back in their face. I think Trump really likes that. And he's very resolute. Trump doesn't like thoughtfulness. He likes someone who's resolute. And I think he likes that brazen, arrogant approach. I think Patel is all of the incompetence with none of the stature or bravado. I just think he looks stupid. And he's making the Trump administration look stupid. And also, it feels like, and I mean, you know this better than me, but it feels like everyone at the FBI is dying to get on the phone with a reporter and shitpost Patel. It just seems like the whole, I mean, there's been such an, I think the two biggest brand versions over the last 12 months have been, number one, the brand US, number two, the brand AI. If you think about what's happened to that brand in the last 12 months, it's gone from 70, 80% people being optimistic to like, now it's one in 10 are optimistic. But the brand of the FBI, I would argue the G-Men, you know, the X-Files, these were people that put on suits but knew how to handle a firearm. We're very measured, we're all about serving in the agency of others, we're optimized for security, not for performance or not for attention. This was a great job with a ton of prestige. And I think Kash Patel has literally trashed this brand. He's turned it into a Joey bag of donuts, you know, two for one, Coyote Ugly, MMA Meats. You know, it's like a bar fight minus the charm.

Speaker 1:
[13:06] Yep. All right. All right. Well, he's out. I agree with you.

Speaker 3:
[13:08] What are your thoughts?

Speaker 1:
[13:10] I think he's gone. I think this was a beautiful piece of reporting. I think they're going to go through the cabinet with next is Lutnick and his corruption, right? That's going to end his like thirsty attention seeking. Anyway, we'll see. I think it's a moment now, especially after small wall. It's a moment for all of them.

Speaker 3:
[13:26] Let me ask you this. How does the head of the FBI have their email hacked by an Iranian group?

Speaker 1:
[13:34] Right.

Speaker 3:
[13:34] How does that happen?

Speaker 1:
[13:36] He's drunk.

Speaker 3:
[13:36] How does that happen?

Speaker 1:
[13:37] Because he's drunk, because he's drinking too much, because he's an idiot, idiot and drunk. He's stupid. You remember the line from Manimal House? Well, that was done by Dean Wormer, but going through life stupid and drunk is not, is no way to live or something like that. Anyway, that's what he's doing.

Speaker 3:
[13:53] When someone asks me if I ever drink in the morning, I'm like, no, because I don't wake up till noon.

Speaker 1:
[13:57] Oh my God. Okay. Enough with the drinking jokes.

Speaker 3:
[14:00] I'm not on a roll today, Kara.

Speaker 1:
[14:01] Let's get to the serious thing.

Speaker 3:
[14:02] I'm not on a roll.

Speaker 1:
[14:03] Iran is threatening to retaliate after the US military seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship trying to bypass the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is calling it an act of piracy. Meanwhile, JD Vance, Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner are headed back to Pakistan for more peace talks, though it's unclear if Iran will even show up. First JD wasn't going, then he was going, and Trump was saying all manner of things. Trump's, of course, is once again threatening to take out Iran's power plants and bridges, which I know it feels like Groundhog Day, but he's doing it again. The ceasefire is due to end this week. I'll also note, Energy Secretary Chris Wright thinks gas prices might stay above $3 until 2027, though Trump is saying that's totally wrong. California was six. It was crazy. It was six in the mid-sixes, which is because they have more taxes there, obviously. But any thoughts? What's happening here? Because it seems like, again, still they still haven't gotten their act together, this gang. They can't shoot straight.

Speaker 3:
[14:59] There's so many things that are bubbling up in terms of incompetence and institutions and a general approach to government that took immense resources that Americans have taken for granted. One of those things is our incredible diplomatic corps. We gutted the diplomats. We gutted the anti-terrorist group. When you have these summits or peace talks, 95-98 percent of the work has done before the person lands on the ground. That's the problem is 0 percent has been done here. He might as well. This is the most, it is so easy to predict nothing is going to come out of this. I've been saying that masculinity, a decent proxy for masculinity is, are you optimizing for attention versus service? If so, that's the opposite of masculinity. That defines this ridiculous trip to Pakistan. There's been no diplomatic work done. He's going to land. He's going to make an indignant speech. He's going to look for a TikTok moment that he attempts to make himself look presidential. He'll make further irresponsible, incendiary, unnecessary comments. He'll leave and nothing will have happened. Right. And the only other, what I've been thinking a lot about lately is kind of the winners and losers here. Initially, China is a loser because of the security threat around not having the free flow of energy. They are such a big winner long term because I was thinking about how does the world structurally change on a demand side? You got to think that in addition to the economic costs, of the Straits of Hormuz being sequestered or blocked, every nation in the world must be thinking, we don't want to be dependent upon fucking Straits that can be controlled by the IRGC or by Trump. So we're going to move to renewables?

Speaker 1:
[16:41] By the way, can I just interject? There's a couple, there's a really good online thing that was about, there's not just the Straits of Hormuz, there's an area near China that 40 percent of the shipping goes through. There's a number of places around the world where this happens.

Speaker 3:
[16:55] The Straits of Malacca or Singapore, the Suez Canal.

Speaker 1:
[16:58] Right, exactly.

Speaker 3:
[16:59] Freedom of Navigation, again, see above things we've taken for granted. Freedom of Navigation was something that had been embraced by the entire world that said everyone's going to pay more, everyone's going to have insecure energy policy if we don't enforce freedom of navigation around the world. But you got to think that every nation is thinking not only economically but from a defense standpoint, we need to have energy security. What does all roads and energy security lead to one place? Renewables. And let's talk about renewables. The advanced manufacturing and long-term thinking of China, get this, what is the global share that China controls of windmill production? Any guesses?

Speaker 1:
[17:37] No, probably a lot.

Speaker 3:
[17:38] A lot, correct. 60 percent. The percentage of EV sold globally.

Speaker 1:
[17:43] China.

Speaker 3:
[17:44] 70 percent. China. The percentage of solar panels produced in the world. 80 percent in China. So, while we're sending diplomatic missions and Canada is announcing they're divorcing from us because we're an absentee irresponsible player in the marriage, China is using advanced manufacturing to say, okay, long-term, everyone's going to start investing in renewables, and we're going to be the place they come to buy it all. And they're not only offering the manufacturing and the products, they're offering safe distribution, they're offering financing for these things, and they're saying, you can count on us. So if you don't want to be subject to the IRGC or President Trump's whims that day, enter into an economic relationship with China.

Speaker 1:
[18:26] Yeah, I agree. I agree. Anyway, it's a real, it's just this is not good from a political point of view, from a world point of view. And a lot of, there's a lot of very high-level people predicting a real collapse of lots of countries in terms of, because of the slowdowns and the problems, that they're just on the edge. I mean, the UAE was asking for some money. This is, they have to solve this yesterday. They shouldn't have done it in the first place. But now they have to solve it yesterday because there's a lot of other, all these countries are interconnected. Whether you like it or not, MAGA folks, this is how it works and you're going to, you're going to see collapses all around. If the UAE is asking for, what did they want? They needed money is really because of the situation. All these luxury brands throughout the Mideast, and that's just small, small ball. It's like all these countries are dependent on this, and so he is reordering the world for sure, but not in the way that favors the United States. Of course, they're sending this team of Wittkopf. Steve Wittkopf, honestly, this is not our best and brightest with Jared Kushner, Steve Wittkopf and JD Vance.

Speaker 3:
[19:33] Well, just a couple of things. If you want to understand what's going to happen in a negotiation with Wittkopf, just ask, how is he going to get his kids rich? That's essentially what is driving these negotiations. But you brought up something really important, and that is the UAE and something that really shocked me. I was looking at analysis of projectiles that have come out of Iran. Do you realize that Iran has shot more projectiles at the UAE than Israel? The UAE really is a model of what it means to not be the IRGC. They have built an unbelievable modern economy, they respect alliances. They in many ways are trying to be more progressive around civil rights. They have made real progress around women's rights. They are everything that the IRGC is not. And it's interesting that of all the nations, the IRGC has decided to go after the UAE most aggressively. That really surprised me. More projectiles under the UAE than Israel.

Speaker 1:
[20:34] But they're asking, they said they're going to be forced to use Chinese money or other currencies if they don't get a financial lifeline. This is just, and that's just one country. There's so many that are just going to be affected. And then, let me just say, lots and lots of people live day to day in this country and cannot afford these prices, these gas prices. And so with Chris Wright just haphazardly saying, it will stay above three and it's even above three, it's above four in DC. It's above like, give me a fucking break. It was six in, this is just these cavalier fuckers. And then that smiling idiot, Kevin Hassett gets on and acts like it's no big deal. There's something really broken about these people that just doesn't understand the implications of anything they do. Anyway, we have to go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about Joe Rogan's influence on executive orders.

Speaker 2:
[21:28] Support for this show comes from Framer.

Speaker 1:
[21:30] Running a business is pretty tough, especially if you're a perfectionist and any and every little mistake on your website just drives you insane. Framer is your shortcut to fixing those problems. Framer is an enterprise-grade, no-code website builder used by teams like companies like Perplexity and Miro to move faster. With real-time collaboration and robust CMS, with everything you need for great SEO, not to mention advanced analytics that include integrated A-B testing, your designers and marketers are empowered to build and maximize your.com from day one. So whether you want to launch a new site, test a few landing pages or migrate your full.com, Framer has programs for startups, scale-ups and large enterprises to make going from an idea to live site as easy and fast as possible. Learn how you can get more out of your.com from a Framer specialist or get started building for free today at framer.com/pivot for 30% off a Framer Pro annual plan. That's framer.com/pivot for 30% off. framer.com/pivotrules and restrictions apply. Support for this show comes from Vanta. If you're a business owner, you might have noticed that risk and regulation are on the rise. Customers now want proof of security before they commit and earning that trust is critical to closing deals. But the process can be expensive, complex, and time-intensive. Vanta says that's the challenge they're here to solve. Vanta automates your compliance process to bring compliance, risk, and customer trust together in one AI-powered platform. So whether you're prepping for a SOC 2 or running an enterprise GRC program, Vanta keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Vanta automates the process of achieving and maintaining compliance with over 35 security and privacy frameworks. This helps companies get compliant fast and remain compliant, opening doors to major growth opportunities and freeing up valuable time. Vanta says companies like Ramp and Writer spent 82 percent less time on audits with Vanta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time to scale. So if you're tired of sifting through old audits and spreadsheets, you can get a system that's always working in the background, keeping you compliant, reducing risk, and helping your business scale fast and with confidence. You can get started at vanta.com/pivot. That's vanta.com/pivot. vanta.com/pivot.

Speaker 2:
[23:49] Support for this show comes from ShipStation.

Speaker 1:
[23:51] When your company is growing fast, order fulfillment can make or break your success. ShipStation's intelligence-driven platform brings order management, rate shopping, inventory and returns, warehouse systems, and comprehensive analytics all in one place, and it can save customers 15 hours per week on fulfillment. With ShipStation, everything you need to manage getting your product to customers is in one place. You can connect to over 200 sales channels, and instead of five to seven disconnected tools, you've got one. You can also set up time-saving automations. ShipStation picks the best carrier, finds you the best rate, prints labels in bulk, and sends tracking updates. Done. Their data shows that sharing tracking details can cut customer service inquiries by 12%. Returns management can give you data on what's coming back and why, and analytics can show you where you're saving and where to optimize. Try ShipStation free for 60 days with full access to all features, no credit card needed. Go to shipstation.com and use the code Pivot for 60 days for free. 60 days gives you plenty of time to see exactly how much time and money you're saving on every shipment. That's shipstation.com code Pivot. shipstation.com code Pivot. Scott, we're back with more news. Trump signed an executive order, fast-tracking FDA review of psychedelic drugs like psilocybin and I think it's ibogaine for mental health treatment, all thanks to a text from Joe Rogan. Rogan texted Trump about ibogaine research in reducing opioid addiction, and the president immediately replied, Sounds great, do you want FDA approval? Let's do it. The order directs the FDA to an expedite review of the breakthrough therapy and encourage data sharing between the Health and Veterans Affairs Department. Honestly, look, Rogan has been turning on Trump, and this was a gimme to Joe Rogan. As you know, I talk about use of psychedelics in this series. It's very promising, but certainly shouldn't be expedited because some podcaster who has very not the best information because they need to do the safety checks if these things are going to be good for people. But if, I mean, what would you text Trump for? What would you like if you could, but this is how it's done in this country. He texts him, he wants him back. It's the most thirsty way to get Rogan's approval, and Rogan is dumb enough to take it and then shift on these things that he cared about, allegedly war and the Epstein things. So the whole thing is just demented. I thought this was the most demented thing, given how important this psychedelic research should be taken throughout this country.

Speaker 3:
[26:30] Your thoughts? Well, ibogaine is, there's real potential here. A Stanford study found a single ibogaine dose reduced veterans disability ratings from 30.2 to 5.1 with effects sustained at least a month out. Almost nine in 10 participants experienced a reduction in PTSD symptoms, nine in 10 decrease in depression, eight in 10 reduce in anxiety. So this has real potential. This is a great move, but here's the problem. This isn't how you do things.

Speaker 1:
[27:00] They've been running this for a year. They could have done this a year ago, but go ahead.

Speaker 3:
[27:03] Well, okay. So I'm a big believer in prison reform. I think we're the most incarcerated nation in the world. And I think that a hugely accretive move would be early prison release and a review of people who are currently incarcerated. And when the Trump administration decides that it would be great to have the Kardashian on boards and she takes this on as an issue, they then get a pardon. He does these things, but he doesn't for political reasons, and they're not systemic in nature. And when it comes to taking something from a class two or a class one drug, I want someone who has domain expertise. I want double blind tests. I think, again, another thing we have taken for granted here is the good people at the CDC are FDA, double blind studies, doctors with actual credentials. I mean, they do a really good job. It's been a huge benefit to us economically. The drugs you take, they do mistakes, but you can feel fairly certain that if you take something that's FDA approved, it's approved for a good reason.

Speaker 1:
[28:09] It's also too slow. It's absolutely too slow on these therapies, but they're still early. And the fact that this very not smart podcaster, who's very lovely in some ways and nutty in some ways, and but doesn't operate in a factual environment all the time, is getting to get this because he was mean to Trump and was turning on him. And then for the next couple of months, he'll be nice to Trump, right? The whole thing is just grotesque in the, this is not how we need to.

Speaker 3:
[28:38] This isn't how you run health policy.

Speaker 1:
[28:40] This is not health policy. That's correct. It's not legal policy. It's purely political. And for Rogan to get used like this on an important issue, maybe if it's important to him, he should demand that Trump not just because he can go to the Oval Office and hug Trump. But it's just, just, oh God. It could hurt veterans if it's not done correctly. The whole, ay, ay, ay. Just, by the way, it's also going to take forever.

Speaker 3:
[29:05] So let's do this. Let's play the game. Let's be increasingly mean and grow our platform 10x. And then what is the one thing you want from Trump? What is the one policy you would want from Trump?

Speaker 1:
[29:15] $25 minimum wage.

Speaker 3:
[29:16] Oh, I love that.

Speaker 1:
[29:18] Universal health care. Child care, universal child care, all those things. Any of those.

Speaker 3:
[29:23] Check, check, check.

Speaker 1:
[29:24] What about you besides, besides like a missile?

Speaker 3:
[29:32] I would want mandatory national service.

Speaker 1:
[29:37] Oh, I like that.

Speaker 3:
[29:39] Distribution of GLP-1 to any household with less than $50,000 in household income.

Speaker 1:
[29:47] With good medical stuff attached to it.

Speaker 3:
[29:51] That's right. And incremental, like you said, single-payer health coverage. And oh gosh, I could go on and lower the estate tax exemption to 1 million. There's going to be $72 trillion in wealth passed on. We're not a dynastic population, we're an American population, and we need to tax inherited wealth. Anyways, I got about another 15.

Speaker 1:
[30:15] Okay. Well, there we go. We don't have his number. Actually, I could probably get Trump's cell phone number.

Speaker 3:
[30:20] Let's get on it. Let's be a pain in the side.

Speaker 1:
[30:21] No, I'm serious. Why don't we do an experiment? Say, this is Scott Galloway. I would like you to do an executive order on young men or whatever the fuck you want. I'm going to get his cell phone, you're going to text him, okay? You're doing it.

Speaker 3:
[30:32] I think it's getting the wiring information of someone and his family and sending a few million dollars. I'm serious. I think there's a direct pipeline. I've heard from credible resources around specific things around pardons and trying to get funding for certain things. That there's an entire infrastructure consultants who launder the money, get it to the Trump administration and you get shit passed. This is, and to be clear, what they would say is this has always been going on, we're just more, we're less, we're more transparent about it.

Speaker 1:
[31:03] No, not like this. I'm going to get his number, you're going to text him, okay? That's what we're doing this week.

Speaker 3:
[31:07] Well, I was invited to the UFC fight at the White House.

Speaker 6:
[31:10] You need to go.

Speaker 1:
[31:11] You need to go. You need to say yes. You need to sidle up to him and pet him.

Speaker 3:
[31:16] I don't like watching young men beat each other up.

Speaker 1:
[31:18] Don't look at that part. Just go pet Trump. That's what you need to do and get universal health care for everybody. You need to do it. You need to go in there. They're not inviting me, even though. Did you hear about this study of influencers?

Speaker 3:
[31:30] Say more.

Speaker 1:
[31:31] It's really interesting. There's a poll that Ipsos did about influencers essentially. First of all, I'm in the top influencers, which is weird. I'm up there with Candice Owen and Tucker Carlson, and all the other people, but I'm the most purple.

Speaker 3:
[31:49] You're the most centrist?

Speaker 1:
[31:51] Yes. I think it's independent. I don't know because they don't all agree, but in terms of impact, I'm shocked that I was even in these lists, but independents love Kara Swisher. It's weird. It's so weird, but it's good.

Speaker 3:
[32:06] That's very exciting.

Speaker 1:
[32:08] Which means that I should be at the UFC fight because I'd actually enjoy it, but you need to go.

Speaker 3:
[32:12] You're an influencer. We got to take you to Coachella and just have you take pictures and not enjoy the music.

Speaker 1:
[32:16] I'm surprised you can go to Coachella, but listen, this is what you have to do. You have to take one for the team or you also have to text Trump because he's not taking my texts, even though I am the person who's the most, who represents the independents apparently, which is ridiculous because I'm really liberal. Yeah, but I'm really liberal, which is kind of funny. All right, the NSA is using Anthropics mythos. Even after the Department of Defense called the company a supply chain risk, Anthropics CEO, Dario Amodi, met with the White House officials on Friday to work towards a compromise to bring the company's technology back to government use. Both sides described the meeting as productive. However, when President Trump was asked about Amodi's visit, he said he had no idea about the meeting. He was meeting with Susie Wiles. If a compromise is reached, it would likely exclude the Pentagon because Hegseth is a moron, and so is Emile Michael, who works for him. So again, everyone I have talked to in the other departments think the Hegseth thing is insane, and that they want to use it because it's a better model. So the NSA wants to use it and everything else. And it's just kind of ridiculous that Amodi has to go out in hand to deal with these children. And by the way, over at OpenAI, more kind of problems. The company lost three executives on Friday, the leader of the defunct Sora, the VP of OpenAI for Science, who we used to work for Twitter, Kevin Weil, and the company's CTO for B2B applications. So they're losing. There's a lot of, it's more dramatic than Google back in the day or Twitter. It just, it's really quite a dramatic little company. So any thoughts on Anthropic or OpenAI?

Speaker 3:
[33:52] Well, you know, history or the world hates a vacuum, and one of the biggest vacuums or voids right now that's creating chaos is the vacuum around regulation and guardrails around AI. And when Dario Amode, who is supposed to be head of a private company charged with just using every tool in his toolkit possible to create leverage and margin for shareholders, gets so worried about something that he pulls it back, and I'm not, you know, and says he's only going to give it to JP Morgan and Apple, you know, the good guys. And you'd like to think he's sincere about it and he's generally concerned, but he shouldn't be making those calls if we're trusting or hoping that the US and existential threats are going to be dependent upon the kindness and wisdom of CEOs. We are fucked because these people have so many incentives and pressure to just deliver against shareholder value.

Speaker 1:
[34:42] I agree. It's a low bar. I was with some people and they're like, Amode's good. I'm like, it's a low fucking bar. And I still don't want him to decide.

Speaker 3:
[34:49] But in one of millions of text chains I got copied on in between you and Rom, I was going to suggest to Rom and any other Democratic presidential candidate, I was actually going to, for some reason, I think John Ossoff and you wrote about this, has given off real presidential energy right now. But I think the opportunity among a Democratic candidate right now, quite frankly, is to have a very thoughtful, get some academics together and have a very thoughtful 10 page or less summarized in a one or two page cover summary is regulation for AI. Do you realize no one's even proposing what it would mean? What does it look like? How do you regulate it? What is it about security? Is it about privacy? Is it about, how do you thread the needle between regulation and also letting our thoroughbreds run such that China does not get out ahead of us, which is a legitimate concern? Who running for president, i.e. everyone, has put out anything thoughtful that has said, I mean, Senator Warner has put out something with Senator Hawley about retraining and trying to support job destruction, but no one has really put out a thoughtful 3, 5, 12-point plan on this is what we should implement immediately and by executive order that lets the economic growth run mostly, it'll cost some economic growth, but gives people some level of certainty that government has some feel around the risks here and outlines them. But there's nothing right now, it's just a wild west and that vacuum is being filled by a bunch of arguments, virtue signaling, false signals, comms releases, press releases. So the vacuum is being filled by chaos around something that people aren't sure, is it a big threat, is it not? And it really hurts the industry because see above, it's gone from 9 in 10 people being optimistic about this to 1 in 10.

Speaker 1:
[36:41] Yeah, they've really fucked it up. And it's not the fault of like me complaining. I got that from one of them. It's like, it's because you're so negative. I'm like, get the fuck out of here. Like it's not our fault. I said that, that's what I actually said.

Speaker 3:
[36:53] I'm an influencer.

Speaker 1:
[36:55] I'm a big, the Indies agree with you. You're right. It's worked, by the way. Anyway, it's just they have done it to themselves. They've done it to themselves because they're so, and you know what drove me crazy? Then you get, this isn't an AI company, but it's all stuck in there. Palantir posting its manifesto on X over the weekend, which one outlet, it was points from Alex Carps, the CEO's book, The Technological Republic. One outlet likened it to the ramblings of a comic book villain, and the points include, posts where neutering of Germany and Japan must be undone. I mean, it's already been undone, you dumbass. We should applaud those who attempt to build where the market failed to act, and we must resist shallow temptation of vacant and hollow pluralism. The whole thing is just so- I need them to shut up. I need all the AI people to shut up, even the good ones, and just put in good things in place, because they keep shooting themselves in the foot about a technology that's possibly dangerous, possibly amazing, and everybody hates it, right? Everyone who's normal hates it, not them, and then they blame us for that.

Speaker 3:
[38:04] Yeah, I don't get it, and I consider myself an influencer, but I suffer from paranoia. I believe that nobody is following me.

Speaker 1:
[38:11] Can I ask you, if you went in there to them, they said, Scott Galloway, we need you to fix this. What would be your first three moves? You missed your brand, we're having you in, we're paying you a bedillion dollars.

Speaker 3:
[38:23] For AI?

Speaker 1:
[38:24] Yeah, the AI companies are like, look, people fucking hate us.

Speaker 3:
[38:28] Yeah, I'd want to assemble a list of technologists, ethicists, and economic advisors, and I would demand a 30-day period where no model, no updated model is ever released without thorough review, that A and B test the shit out of this thing in terms of existential risks. And if it takes fucking a decade to get a drug through the FDA, why wouldn't we mandate that the government gets to play with any new model for 30 days? And then says, we have found that this could absolutely hack the NSA or even our nuclear launch codes. So you need to tweak the following things. And we're going to assemble a blue ribbon panel. Anyone on this panel will be paid a lot of money, have tremendous prestige. And by the way, for three years, there's a sunshine period and you cannot go on the board of any of these companies because we don't want you trading off speaking engagements in stock options for security. But at a minimum, we should have a 30 day screening blue ribbon panel that includes Europeans, that includes G6 nations, that includes stock market analysts and say, okay, there has to be a balance between safety and economic growth. Instead, it's just like put it out there and see what happens.

Speaker 1:
[39:42] I know. From a marketing, if you're doing an ad, what would it be? We know we suck or what? What's the message for the AI companies?

Speaker 3:
[39:52] But here's the bottom line, Kara, is that the markets love a winner. The worst thing that's happening to Sam Altman right now is he's proving himself to be not a great CEO, and he's let Anthropic literally leapfrog him. The markets are immoral. Anthropic is going to get out at a trillion dollar plus valuation because it is executing like no one's business. Cowork is on fire. They are doing such a great job. I think Dario is managing his brand fairly well. I think if I were Dario, and I think he's going to do this given that, God, I can't imagine as much on his own plate, I would almost, I don't want to say circumvent the government, but I would be putting together an industry consortium across all of them and saying, these are our recommendations.

Speaker 1:
[40:36] Yeah. Even critics of them.

Speaker 3:
[40:37] And trying to be as thoughtful. I would also offer a bunch of LLMs for free to researchers and academics and say, have at it. We think this could cure cancer. Have at it.

Speaker 1:
[40:46] Yeah. I have to say, I do like, I think he's messaging well, but he never comes up with solutions. Like he just tells us it's all falling apart. So, you know, David Sachs went after him this week for being too negative. And I don't think he is. I just think while he's offering these scary scenarios, he needs to say, okay, here's what we can do. Like he doesn't do that enough. That's what I would say about him.

Speaker 3:
[41:09] But why wouldn't they, why wouldn't they, I mean, they have a lot of money. Why wouldn't they take, I don't know, a billion dollars and start a center at Berkeley and said, this center is going to be focused on incurable diseases, and we're going to give them all the models for free. We're going to give them compute, inference, and a lot of people would say, no, it's the profit motive. But just from a, I don't want to sound a perception standpoint, but why wouldn't you say, we're starting a center for diplomatic prevention of conflict using AI? They could just do so many interesting things that show they're concerned about.

Speaker 1:
[41:43] They're doing little bits of that, but yeah, their brand is really bad. And listen, Dario is going to be dragged down with the rest of them if they don't do something about it.

Speaker 3:
[41:51] Every journey is the same from Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader. We think they're the ones that are going to save us, that they should be president, and then we find out like the rest of them, their job is to do and say whatever will get their share price up.

Speaker 1:
[42:03] The feet of clay.

Speaker 3:
[42:05] There you go. It's the villain's journey. They always end up a Bond villain. And I like Dario. I don't know him personally, but I think he's made a series of really good moves. He's clearly an outstanding CEO. But here's an easy prediction. In 24 months, we'll hate him too. Because we will fall into the trap of believing that these people are responsible for our well-being. They're not. They're responsible for shareholder value and that comes at a cost. And when no one's home, see above that void. Who is proposing anything resembling AI regulation right now?

Speaker 1:
[42:35] Well, they say it and then it's a one-off.

Speaker 3:
[42:38] What would you do? What would you want to see?

Speaker 1:
[42:40] I would put to, I think that's, I actually hadn't thought about it, but I would not add saying how good we are. I would have an, well, I had a back and forth with Dario's people. I'm going to see him this week. But one of the things I said is, you're doing all these soft interviews, do some fucking hard ones. And I was of course pitching for me, but get out there and do a lot. And it doesn't have to just be him. It has to be a lot of people. Instead, we're doing, Sam Altman sort of had a series of bad interviews, but it's got to be a broader discussion among a lot more people, and demand that your critics are right in front of you, and don't wilt when a critic says something. They just don't want bad news, and it doesn't matter. People hate them. They really hate them. And so, look at the polls, look at young people. I mean, the brand destruction is going to take them all down, and there's so many promising things with AI. I mean, look what happened to Reese Witherspoon this week. I got slammed because I said, what was she saying? That was because they thought she was being paid by Chad GPT or Charles Porch or whatever it happened to be. But did you see all that? Like, because she was saying women need to use-

Speaker 3:
[43:51] I didn't understand why she got so much hate for that.

Speaker 1:
[43:54] Because they thought it was an ad. I think they, and maybe it was. I don't really care what she was saying was accurate. It doesn't, I mean, they said she's bought and paid for, and she must be getting money because she has blackstone money through the whatever. Honestly, it was so innocuous, and because she does books and so all the people, it was innocuous what she said, seriously innocuous. I got slammed for, I wasn't really defending her. I'm like, what is she saying that's so weird? Again, even if she was paid, I don't think the message was a bad one. But I guess, and then it was like, well, I'm not going to use AI, so there. And I'm like, well, don't then, what do you want? But if you will care about where it's going, you need, it's like, in the early Internet, there were all these people who said, I'm not using the web. I'm like, knock yourself out, but it's happening, my friends. Don't turn on that flash, that electric light. I don't care. It's just anyway, it's a bad, there's a lot of rage. There's the rage at her was insane, I thought. Anyway, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, why Netflix stock plummeted after its latest earnings? I'm eager to hear what you have to say, Scott. Support for the show comes from Delete Me. Delete Me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. You don't have to be a public figure to be at risk of having your personal information stolen by bad actors. The terrifying reality is that we're all susceptible and the impact of identity theft can be devastating. Delete Me can help you protect personal privacy or the privacy of your business from doxing attacks before sensitive information can be exploited. I have used Delete Me for a while. I think it's really important to be aware of what's out there about you. It's really surprising. Even someone like me who spends a lot of time protecting their privacy, how much information is out there, how much of it is bad and how much is being compiled together. You really have to fight hard to keep your privacy and Delete Me is an excellent tool. Last year, The New York Times Wirecutter named Delete Me their top pick for data removal services. Not a surprise. So what are you waiting for? Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20 percent off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindeleteeme.com. slash pivot and use the promo code pivot at checkout. The only way to get 20 percent off is to go to joindeleteeme.com. slash pivot, enter the code pivot at checkout. That's joindeleteeme.com. slash pivot code pivot. Support for this show comes from Bowlin Branch. As the years go by, sleep just becomes that much more important, and not just any kind of sleep, quality sleep. Thankfully, the sheets made by Bowlin Branch can help you get the REM sleep you desperately need. Bowlin Branch Bedding is designed for exactly that kind of rest. From their signature organic cotton sheets to plush pillows, breathable blankets and temperature-regulating comforters, everything is made to create a bed that truly supports good sleep. Soft, breathable, and built to get better over time. This is sleep you don't compromise on. I was lucky to get some items from Bowl and Branch, and I have to say, I love them. I got a waffle blanket that I love. It's so soft, it's breathable, it's just wonderful. And especially as we go into summer, it's really nice to have a breathable, yet warm, yet not too warm blanket. Upgrade your sleep with Bowl and Branch. Get 15 percent off your first order plus free shipping at bowlandbranch.com/pivot with code pivot. That's Bowl and Branch, bollandbranch.com/pivot, code pivot to unlock 15 percent off. It's completely worth it. Exclusions apply.

Speaker 2:
[47:59] adobe.com/do that with Acrobat.

Speaker 1:
[48:05] Scott, we're back with more news. Netflix is out with its first earnings report since walking away from the Warner Brothers deal back in February. The company beat expectations on revenue and earnings driven by membership growth, ad sales, and higher subscription prices, plus that $2.8 billion breakup fee. Thanks, Ellison. Thanks, Paramount. But the Q2 forecast was below analyst expectations. It set shares down 10 percent. The earnings also came with a few announcements, a deeper push into AI, and the launch of a TikTok-like vertical video feed within the app. They're trying to do a lot more. AI makes total sense in that regard. Notably, Netflix co-founder and chairman of the board, Reed Hastings, is leaving the company when his term expires in June. He wants to do a lot of other things. Talk first about the earnings. We're going to get into the Netflix's podcast plans in just a second. I can go over what they're doing, but why don't you talk about the earnings themselves? Can I just take a moment? I met Reed Hastings right at the beginning of this company, and I have known him for a long time. I got to say, an amazing entrepreneur, what he did and shifted deserves enormous credit. He was the real engine and Ted is doing a great job. So is Bella Bajaria, so are the new people there. But Reed Hastings is a generational entrepreneur, and congratulations on your tenure. Go ahead.

Speaker 3:
[49:22] Yeah, great. The earnings were fantastic. Their revenue was up 16% year over year, beating expectations. Their earnings was nearly double what analysts expected. There was a bit of a sugar high, though, because of the $3 billion termination fee from the Collapse Warner Brothers deal. What shocked me was the ad tier now drives over 60% of new signups in ad-supported markets. They're on track to hit $3 billion in ad revenue this year, so now they're becoming a big media player, ad-supported media player, with a business that barely even existed two years ago. The full year guidance held at about 51 to 52 billion, but Q2 guidance of 13% growth came in below what the bulls wanted to see. I looked at these earnings. I mean, this is the weird and the beautiful thing about the market. If I'd seen these earnings before the market's reaction, I would have guessed the market would be flat to up. So I don't know if they're taking Reed's departure as a signal this is no longer a growth company or that just some air was coming out of the stock. I don't get it. I don't, you know, there was some speculation that Reed was leaving because of the botched Warner Brothers deal. I think that's bullshit. I think like you said, he just wants to do different things. He has a lot of stuff to work for. The stock was up 18% year to date heading into the print. Now it's just up 7%, but that's not bad. I did meet with Ted Sarandos two years ago, and I told him I thought they should launch a TikTok competitor because the long tail of Netflix content doesn't get viewed very much. I thought have an open source opportunity for artists and creators to slice it up, and it would be incredible marketing, and I think they could have a viable competitor to TikTok. At that point, you said we use TikTok as a marketing.

Speaker 1:
[51:10] I would trust them. I like their stuff, so I would trust them.

Speaker 3:
[51:14] It looks like they're getting into the business. They're launching a TikTok style vertical video feed this month, and YouTube has 13 percent of all US TV viewing versus Netflix at 9 percent, but YouTube shorts has grown 186 percent in 15 months, with shorts on connected TV accounting for part of their growth. And then Metta recently announced that Reels for TV, they're doing Reels for TV where users can watch short-form content on television, and Reels already has a $50 billion annual run rate in ad revenue. That's more revenue than WBD and NBCUniversal combined. And basically everyone now, 95 percent of consumers now watch some form of short-form video.

Speaker 1:
[51:57] Kara Swisher.

Speaker 3:
[51:58] And since pre-pandemic, time spent-

Speaker 1:
[52:00] Don't you?

Speaker 3:
[52:01] Time spent watching- Oh, I hate to admit it. People ask me what my media sources were, and I used to say the FT and the Economist to sound smart. The bottom line is I'm getting most of my content from short-form video right now.

Speaker 1:
[52:12] Me too.

Speaker 3:
[52:13] And time spent watching video content on social media has more than doubled since the pandemic. And Meta's revenues have nearly tripled and TikToks have grown tenfold. So I think that what Netflix has is they have proprietary content. So proprietary content that's not user-generated, but user-edited? What could you do? There's been some amazing Netflix content that never bubbles up and never gets seen. Put it out and say, guys, have at it. Slice it into two-minute things, create new stories, add in different effects, add in different humor, different subtitles, have at it. What I pitched, Ted, I'm like, start something called Net Vibes and basically say it's a TikTok competitor that has all the proprietary content of the long-tail stuff.

Speaker 1:
[52:58] I love that, Scott.

Speaker 3:
[52:59] The 90 percent that gets 2 percent of your viewership time.

Speaker 1:
[53:02] Why did you just give away that great name? That was really good. You're talented. That was good. You said two very smart things today.

Speaker 3:
[53:10] It's because I was under the influence. Anyways, Ted just rolled his eyes and said, why would we do that when TikTok is such a great marketing engine for us right now? But it looks like they're saying, okay, we no longer, we need a growth story. I think this is a great idea. I think they're doing it. With the case of Netflix, the second mouse may get the cheese here. I think it's a great idea for them.

Speaker 1:
[53:32] Interesting. All right. Let me just tell you, the second thing is they're going in all in on podcasts, which is interesting. I have a lot of information about this because I immediately started looking into it. Netflix has announced five more shows coming to its platforms. These are exclusive shows including a new weekly interview show with Brian Williams. Hulu has also announced four more podcasts including Handsome and three others based on TV shows. Hulu is not as strict as Netflix. Netflix requires the shows to forgo YouTube entirely and Hulu does not, it looks like. So this is really interesting. So I asked what the deals were and someone said, deal structure looks like this. Episodic fee, low end of 25K an episode, averaging average range 50 to 75K an episodes, higher for celeb talent. Production budget on top, six to 12 month initial terms with 26 to 52 episodes, depending on term length, ownership, Netflix, but sometimes they are given reversion rights. IP maybe if they're making them. I wasn't tremendously impressed with the choices they made. I like Brian Williams, but it seems like they should really go for a much more younger demo I guess, or more online demo, influencer demo, but that was just me. What are your thoughts here? What do you think? That's a lot of money. If you got $50,000 an episode, that's a buttload of money, $2.5 million a year.

Speaker 3:
[54:57] Well, we've been talking in our own book, but it doesn't mean I don't believe it. Every political cycle, there is a technology. Obama weaponized search, Trump, Facebook. I would say the second one was about social. A lot of people would say, this is now, these midterms are going to be AI midterms with a ton of misinformation. But I think in general, this election or the last election was really the podcast election. Do you remember that graph that showed that newspapers were getting 30 percent of all ad revenue, but they only had 8 percent readership, and the Internet was getting 10 percent of revenue but had 50 percent of all time. Those two tend to calibrate. The fastest growing out supported medium in the nation is not meta or alphabet, it's podcasting.

Speaker 1:
[55:42] Which is video casting really, but go ahead.

Speaker 3:
[55:46] It's television with a lower cost of means of production. It's 80 percent of TV.

Speaker 1:
[55:50] And a closer relationship with fans that you can't leave that out. It's not just because it's cheap.

Speaker 3:
[55:55] And it's not starched. It's not a handsome guy saying save content for 22 minutes and then showing a video about a butterfly garden. It's people who are willing. And some people like the conspiracy shit. And some people want people calling Hegseth a drunk. And sometimes people are just so fucking talented that they bubble up past the means of production that have sequestered some of this talent. And it was podcasting. The Golden Globes now has it as a category. We're up, Pivot is up 25% or 30% this year. PropG Media is up 46% this year. Podcasts are growing like crazy. And what's even more interesting is the chaser effects are the following. The average age of a Fox viewer is 69, CNN 67, CNBC 64. The average podcast listener is 34. And when you're 34, it means you're buying houses, cars, getting kids, which are very expensive, and dogs. So this is, quote unquote, the core demographic. So in addition, as evidenced by the fact that the easiest guess for Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway to get on their show is someone running for president.

Speaker 1:
[57:13] Yeah, they're calling it all the time.

Speaker 3:
[57:14] We can call anyone who's thinking, quote unquote, not going to make the decision in a year or two year with their family. Yeah, they're calling us and they want to come on because they're running for president.

Speaker 1:
[57:24] I had so many messages right now.

Speaker 3:
[57:26] Because what's interesting is that, I don't know if you found this, but I'm proud to say they don't perform that well. I find that really interesting.

Speaker 1:
[57:33] Some of them do. Buttigieg did great. I'll tell you that.

Speaker 3:
[57:37] He's exceptional. He's exceptional.

Speaker 1:
[57:40] Mnuchin did really well. That's not true. It's not true. Some of them do well. It depends. I'm going to pay attention to what does well.

Speaker 3:
[57:46] I find on average politicians don't score nearly as well as some of the other guests we have, in terms of downloads or viewership. But my point is people actually listen to the ads. The other innovation that no traditional media company wanted to do because they decided their talent was too precious is host read overs. If you just do an insert ad on YouTube or just an insert ad, you get between 3 and 10 bucks CPMs. You reading over an ad, you talking about your Chevy Bolt and how much you like it, which you really do, that gets a CPM of 45 or 50 bucks. The media company at General Motors, it's like they're allocating more and more money, and now these things finally have the scale. So Netflix could be the new. Netflix is late on short for video, they're late on podcasts, but when you have direct relationship with 80 percent of households, you can play catch up pretty fast.

Speaker 1:
[58:42] One of the things that drives me crazy with the media reporters when they were talking about the Vox thing, I was like, you all don't get where the money is now, where the voices are, where the, like, it just drives me crazy because they're living in a different world. Like when I, not all of them, by the way, but when I, I've been doing a lot of press for this CNN thing and I'm like, they're like, oh, is Vox trying to, you know, just save itself? I'm like, no, it has valuable, a thing that's valuable, you idiots. And so, you know, and the same thing with these deals, they were sort of poopooing, I'm like, you don't understand what's happening here. And I can't say it enough, just sitting at a table on a street in San Francisco with my son, the kind of people that stopped, people that stopped me on the street now, it's really astonishing, like nothing I've ever done. And it's, and most of people, Scott, tell me thank you for doing what you and Scott are doing, or thank you for doing that interview. They thank you for your content. It never happened to me before in my life. So I don't know how you feel about that.

Speaker 3:
[59:46] The most rewarding thing about it, I mean, look, the money's great, but the most rewarding thing about it is that when people come up to you, they start speaking to you as if they're your friend. And it's really nice. People feel a parasocial, they have a parasocial relationship with you and they feel good about you. I think it's because you're physically in their ears oftentimes, so it creates intimacy. And also, you're talking to them as they're doing something quite personal. They're walking the dog, they're doing the dishes. It's their morning routine. But I think the most rewarding thing about being a podcaster, if you get to a certain point, it's a little bit like the NBA. The analogy I use is that when I rode crew at UCLA, there's been 2,000 people who have rode crew, 10 went to the Olympics. So what is that? Like 0.5 percent, not even, 0.5 percent went to the Olympics. It's 0.1 percent of podcasters are self-sustaining economically. So you are five times more likely to go to the Olympics if you rode at UCLA than have a successful podcast. This is a difficult business, but once you get to break even, the economics here are incredible because what do we have? We have three producers, we outsource our ad sales to Vox, and this is a $15 million business growing to 25, probably in the next 24 months. Just do the math, this is an incredibly, this creates as much EBITDA. Pivot will probably create as much EBITDA is one of the most successful shows on MS Now or Fox or anywhere else. It won't be as big top line, but the EBITDA margins are just incredibly dramatic, but hands down, the most rewarding thing from a host standpoint.

Speaker 1:
[61:33] It's the relationship with Vance.

Speaker 3:
[61:35] These really lovely people come up to you and they start talking to you about their kids. I mean, maybe they do that.

Speaker 1:
[61:41] No, I've never had it happen. Never had it happen. My whole career, I have had a long and pretty well-known career. But I'll tell you, a very famous author was on my plane today and he texted me, he had my number, he texted me, just thank you for what you're doing. He didn't want to say hi because he felt like he was bothering me, which he wasn't.

Speaker 3:
[62:00] But what I'll say is, we have a responsibility, and I think our responsibility, and I'm trying to live up to this, is the medium is creating good vibes, I think mostly because, and I do think this is true of most podcasts. When you go on cable TV, and this happened to me when I went on Pierce Morgan or a couple of times when I've gone on Fox, they're trying to engage a little bit in call-out culture and create antagonism. I have found the vast majority of podcasters, when I go on their podcast, even if they disagree with me, even if they're conservative, they're trying to present you in a fair and positive light. And I think as podcasters, we have an obligation to maintain that cultural zeitgeist, to show some grace. Even if you disagree with people, we're not in the business of calling them out. You want a thoughtful, nuanced conversation. Let them run with their views.

Speaker 1:
[62:46] Yes, I wouldn't say no. It's okay to disagree and it's okay to push back. I do think you have to informational and like let's hear this person is what I'm trying to do and I like with the Tillis one.

Speaker 3:
[62:57] Your goal isn't to make them look stupid.

Speaker 1:
[63:00] Right, sometimes they do.

Speaker 3:
[63:01] Your goal is to have a thoughtful discourse such that your listeners learn, but also to demonstrate the people from different sides of the political spectrum can demonstrate some grace towards each other.

Speaker 1:
[63:13] I agree. I agree with you. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails.

Speaker 6:
[63:22] Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has been talking about the war in Iran in distinctly Biblical terms, citing Psalms, the resurrection of Jesus and the Book of Quentin.

Speaker 7:
[63:32] And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to capture and destroy my brother.

Speaker 6:
[63:39] President Trump is comparing himself to Christ. Vice President Vance is fighting with the Pope. Watching all of this is the increasingly influential pastor Doug Wilson. He co-founded the church that Hegseth attends. Wilson's a Christian nationalist who would like the USA to be a theocracy. He'd also like to help us get there, though he doesn't think it's going to happen anytime soon.

Speaker 8:
[63:59] I believe that it is accelerating. I believe that we're making significant gains. I see us assembling resources and I'm encouraged in that labor. But I don't expect to see what we're praying for in my lifetime.

Speaker 6:
[64:13] Pastor Doug Wilson and how much you should worry about his plans on Today Explained from Vox, weekdays, afternoons, wherever.

Speaker 9:
[64:23] Immigration may be Donald Trump's signature issue.

Speaker 4:
[64:26] President Trump is now targeting predominantly democratic cities for ICE raids and deportations.

Speaker 2:
[64:31] Dozens of protesters clashing with immigration and customs enforcement agents in Minneapolis.

Speaker 10:
[64:36] We will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came.

Speaker 9:
[64:44] But what we want to do in this space is talk about America and politics beyond the current president. So what do most Americans think about deportation and border security, period?

Speaker 11:
[64:54] I think that Americans are definitely against the kind of violent displays that we've seen in the street from ICE. When it comes to the question of deportation, the answer is more complicated. My sense is that people want border at the border. They don't like the idea of having no idea who's coming into the United States at any given time.

Speaker 9:
[65:14] The view on immigration from the bottom up instead of the top down. That's this week on America Actually, every Saturday in your audio and video feeds.

Speaker 12:
[65:26] Hi, I'm Brene Brown.

Speaker 5:
[65:28] And I'm Adam Grant.

Speaker 12:
[65:29] And we're here to invite you to the Curiosity Shop.

Speaker 5:
[65:31] A podcast that's a place for listening, wondering, thinking, feeling and questioning.

Speaker 12:
[65:36] It's going to be fun. We rarely agree.

Speaker 5:
[65:39] But we almost never disagree. And we're always learning.

Speaker 12:
[65:43] That's true. You can subscribe to the Curiosity Shop on YouTube or follow in your favorite podcast app to automatically receive new episodes every Thursday.

Speaker 1:
[65:55] Okay, Scott, we're going to do some wins and fails. I'm going to go first if you don't mind. I already talked about Palantir's Stupid Manifesto, but two people, Ron Conway, a really well-known figure in Silicon Valley, I like very much. He was the one that was pushing back on. I just really like him. He and I have had lots of beefs over the years, but he's a really legendary venture capitalist. He announced he had a cancer. He's not giving specifics about it, and he's fighting it. He's given so much money to medical stuff in San Francisco, incredibly generous and unusual for a lot of these VCs who just only think about themselves. But Ron's a very civic minded person in San Francisco. People have different views with him, and I really adore him. He's struggling with some cancer, and he wrote me a series of very joyful texts over the weekend. I love you. Thank you so much. I wrote him a note, and I just hope he has all the money and all the connections in science, because he's done so much fundraising. I hope for the best for him. The second one is, so that's a fail for mine, and same thing is Senator Warner's daughter died. She had juvenile diabetes and a series of health issues, and both Scott and I love talking to him. We find him very thoughtful, and so my condolences go to him. She's 36 years old, and again, struggled with juvenile diabetes and ensuing bunches of issues. My win is this Atlantic piece. It's a little bit of a dunker, but everyone is getting on board with this idea that maybe the tech billionaires aren't here to help us, which I think is a narrative I've tried to get through a little bit. But I thought that this guy Noah Hawley, who was responsible for Fargo and a bunch of other things I love online, he's been writing for The Atlantic and I just really, really enjoy his work. But let me just read two quotes from this piece in The Atlantic. It's called, What I Learned About Billionaires at Jeff Bezos' Private Retreat. These guys are having their own retreats. Bezos' is called Campfire. It's a devastating piece actually, and I think very true and fair. This is the hubris of accomplishment. To be declared a genius at one thing is to begin to believe you are a genius at everything. It's not that the wealthy become evil, it's that their environment stops teaching them the things that non-wealthy people are forced to learn simply by living in a world that pushes back, when you can buy your way out of any mistake, when you can fire anyone who disagrees with you, when your social circle consists entirely of people who need something from you, the basic mechanism by which humans learn that other people are real goes dark. Fantastic piece, Noah Hawley. I recommend it. It's beautifully written and incredibly fair. And so anyway, yours?

Speaker 3:
[68:49] I'm just going to, I'm just parroting your comments. I did not know that about Ron Conway and I'm sorry to hear that. Ron invested in two of my companies back in the 90s, when I was playing in traffic and starting e-commerce companies. He invested, he was one of my first investors in Red Envelope, and one of my first investors in my e-commerce incubator, Brandfarm.

Speaker 1:
[69:08] I didn't know that.

Speaker 3:
[69:09] Wow. Yeah. And I'll say this about Ron. You know, you have good investors and you have bad investors. And Ron, I would just describe as incredibly supportive. No matter what was going on, it was emotionally and financially just like really on the side of entrepreneurs. And I'm sorry to hear that, and I share your warm wishes. Also share your condolences and sympathies with Senator Warner. Obviously, every parent's worst nightmare. I know Senator Warner, I would consider myself friendly, but I'm not close friends with him, but I have a close friend who's very close to Senator Warner. And the Senator has been approached by any number of people on a regular basis about running for president. And a lot of people felt that he brought the gravitas, the credentials, and quite frankly, the kind of moderate positioning that they thought would be a great candidate for president. And what I have heard is that he never ever, ever seriously considered it because he was always very focused on his family. So he is that guy, not the one who was performative. Oh, I'm going to check with my family. He was oftentimes people wanted to draft him, but he was always kind of family first. Anyways, share your condolences. My win is much more boring. I just wanted to talk a little bit about Reed Hastings and just the incredible tenure, 99 to 2023, founded in 1997. So he's there 30 years. So you want to talk about from a startup to global giant. In 2000, they had 300,000 subscribers. This year, they'll have 300 million. The revenue went from 3 billion in 2011. This year, it will do 45 billion. In terms of market value, they rejected a $50 million acquisition offer in 2000. This year, they're now worth about 400 billion. One of the largest value creations in tech history. In terms of business transformation, talk about the mother of all big ball pivots, DVD rentals to streaming in 2007, from streaming to original content with House of Cards. And then he's gone from the US to 190 plus countries globally. Their profitability, tons of losses in the 2000s, multi-billions in annual profits. And then the cultural impact that people don't talk enough about was that Netflix deck they put out on their culture. They talk about freedom and responsibility, no vacation limits, high performance culture. And the thing, I did actually take something from them. They stated out loud that they wanted to be a company known for exceptional compensation. And I've tried to adopt the same thing. I've always tried to pay my people more than market, or I shouldn't say always, the last 10 years. But this company, they took a DVD by mail startup, they pivoted into streaming, they scaled it globally, and they turned it into a half a trillion dollar media platform. 30 years, 1,000x user growth, 15x revenue growth, and, you know, redefined or defined the category. I would argue one of the top 5 to 10 tech CEO careers of the last 30 years, and know what? He did it with a lot of grace. He was never in...

Speaker 1:
[72:27] Grace, absolutely.

Speaker 3:
[72:28] He was never scandal, never shitposting other people, never found drunk driving, never shitty tweets that he had to erase or delete.

Speaker 1:
[72:39] Never attention on himself. Can I just add that? I've had him on stage many times, but I have to say, of all the people, I would rather spend time with Reed Hastings. And I know Hollywood all hates their missed system, but it's not their fault that they found a way to do a different system. It's Hollywood's fault for having a bad economic system that was no longer sustainable. They like to sort of blame Netflix. I think that's unfair. They do what they do. That's what they make. I don't think they're diminishing it. You don't have to watch it if you don't like it in that regard. And I think they put out a lot of great content actually. They put a lot of silly content too. But I got to tell you, he's a fucking class act. So is Ron. They're class acts. All these guys you're talking about.

Speaker 3:
[73:22] And he clearly imprinted really solid DNA. The co-seers now are Greg Peters and Ted Sorandos. I don't know Greg, but I know Ted. But they're both have a reputation for being not only very intelligent, but very decent men. So Netflix is a great company, great leadership, and this guy's historic run is historic. So my win is the tenure of Reed Hastings.

Speaker 1:
[73:44] By the way, one of the things I was thinking about, Scott, was you talked about that is the decency. And we started with the incompetence like a Kash Patel. People are fucking sick of these incompetence and these like, look at me, performative bullshit liars. Like, I don't know what else to say, but I was watching Obama and Mondani, they were promoting universal free childcare and singing Wheels on the Bus. Did you see that video?

Speaker 3:
[74:09] It was very likable, humane. It was really nice.

Speaker 1:
[74:14] Yes, it was so nice. I was like, enough of that, the other shit, the Kash Patels, and more of that, more Wheels on the Bus. That's all I have to say. Anyway, we want to hear from you, send us your questions about business tech or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com/pivot to submit a question for the show or call 85551 Pivot. Elsewhere in the Karen Scott universe, this week on On with Kara Swisher, I spoke with comedian Nikki Glazer, who has a new stand-up special called Good Girl coming out Friday on Hulu. She talked about how overcoming fear pushes her to be the best. Let's listen to a clip.

Speaker 13:
[74:48] I love fear. I run into fear. Picture fear as like a wall that you have to run into. I kind of go into that of like, I know that my self-esteem is built upon doing things that are hard and conquering them. So I know that on the other side of doing this horribly uncomfortable thing is me feeling better about myself.

Speaker 1:
[75:07] It's a great interview. Scott, you reminded me of you a little bit. It was interesting.

Speaker 13:
[75:11] I was talking to her.

Speaker 1:
[75:12] It was interesting. I think you'll like it.

Speaker 3:
[75:13] I like her because she's dirty.

Speaker 1:
[75:14] She's also dirty. She talked about that. Anyway, the show is called Good Girl, and she's not always good in the show, but actually she is. She's a really talented comic. I like her a lot and very thoughtful and very funny. That's the most important part. That's the show. Thanks for listening to Pivot, and be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. We'll be back on Friday.

Speaker 3:
[75:35] Today's show was produced by Lara Namenswine, Marcus Taylor Griffin, and Todd Weissman. Ernie Interstodd engineered the episode. Rich Sibley edited the video. Thanks also to Joe Brosman, Severia Ndanch, Alana Shack, Khoraz Vox, music executive producer, podcast. Make sure to follow Pivot on your favorite podcast platform. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You can get subscribed to the magazine n1mag.com/pod. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown of all things tech and business care. Have a great rest of the week.